Smt Nirmala Devi vs Registrar Of Co Operative Societies & Ors.

$~95
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
th
Date of decision: 19 May, 2026
th
Uploaded on: 20 May, 2026
+ W.P.(C) 19351/2025& CM APPL. 33945/2026
SMT NIRMALA DEVI .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Aadil Singh Boparai, Ms.
Prakruthi Jain & Mr. Chirag Dahiya,
Advs.
versus
REGISTRAR OF CO OPERATIVE SOCIETIES & ORS.
.....Respondents
Through: Ms. Urvi Mohan, Adv. for GNCTD.
Mr. Kapil Yadav, Mr. Ashish
Sehrawat & Ms. Shweta Goswami,
Advs. for R-2.
Ms. Namrata Mukim Panel Counsel
DDA with Ms. Sakshi Saxena and Ms.
Niharika Singh, Advs. for R-3.
Mr. Gaganmeet Singh, Mr. Harshpreet
Singh and Mr. Hridyesh Khanna,
Advs. for DDA.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUSTICE MADHU JAIN
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. Mrs. Nirmala Devi, wife of Mr. Hem Raj Bansal who is a member of
Jatav Co-operative Group Housing Society Ltd. (hereinafter, ‘Society’ ) has
filed the present writ petition seeking regularisation of the allotment of flat
no. E-209, Second floor, in the Society also known as Venus Apartments Zone
H/4-5, Rani Bagh, Opp. Sainik Vihar, Pitampura, Delhi-110034 in her favour.
3. The Petitioner is a 77 year old senior citizen. A draw of lots was
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19351/2025 Page 1 of 6
Digitally Signed
By:RAHUL
Signing Date:20.05.2026
17:16:13

th
conducted on 14 June, 1998 by the Society and the share certificate was
issued in favour of one Mr. Shiv Raj Singh Kardam. He had taken possession
th
of flat no. E-209 which was given to him. Vide Power of Attorney dated 4
August, 2003 executed in favour of the Petitioner by Mr. Kardam, the
Petitioner was permitted to manage the flat and various other covenants were
included in the said Power of Attorney, including that of sale.
4. According to the Petitioner the Society issued a ‘No Objection
Certificate’ to the Petitioner to apply before the Delhi Development Authority
(hereinafter, ‘DDA’ ) for transfer of the flat from leasehold to freehold,
however, since the allotment of the flat in favour of the Petitioner itself was
th th
not yet forthcoming, various representations dated 12 June, 2018 and 17
November, 2025 were written by the Petitioner seeking allotment.
5. The Registrar Cooperative Societies (hereinafter, ‘RCS’ ) is stated to
th
have not replied to the representations, but finally on 27 April, 2026, the
letter has been received from the RCS that the flat cannot be allotted to the
Petitioner as the draw of lots was a self draw without approval of the RCS.
6. Ld. Counsel for the Petitioner relies upon the decision of this Court in
W.P.(C) 12218/2021 titled ‘ Rajeev Saxena & Ors. v. Registrar of
th
Cooperative Societies & Ors.’ dated 16 May, 2025 as also REV. PET.
457/2025 in W.P. (C) 7853/2024 titled ‘ Smt. Janak Kumari Gandhi & Ors.
v. Registrar of Cooperative Societies & Ors.’ The submission on behalf of
the Petitioner is that the Petitioner’s membership is not in doubt and the ‘No
Objection Certificate’ has also been issued by the Society. Moreover, the self
draw of lots has been regularised by a decision taken by the then Lieutenant
th
Governor dated 20 September, 2011.
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19351/2025 Page 2 of 6
Digitally Signed
By:RAHUL
Signing Date:20.05.2026
17:16:13

7. Heard. In Rajiv Saxena (Supra) , this Court had observed as under:
st
“5. On 31 March, 2005, the Housing Society
informed the RCS of the self draw of lots and an
approval of the same was sought. It is seen that since
2005 continuously, the RCS raised queries after queries,
however, the approval was not given. In the meantime,
there were various others societies who had also
conducted the draw of flats by themselves without the
approval of the RCS. Thereafter, on 20th September,
2011 Mr. Tejendra Khanna, the then Hon’ble
Lieutenant Governor, Delhi (hereinafter “the LG”) had
taken a decision qua approval of the said self conducted
draw of lots, in the following terms:
“ I have perused the file.
The notification to regularize the
draw of lots of 26 societies and proposal for
withdrawal of proceedings for supersession
u./s 37 of the DCS Act are approved. The
permission to invite other societies which
might have conducted self-draw before
2010 to give them opportunity for
regularization is also given .
I do not favour debarment of office
bearers u/s 77(2) of DCS Act since the draws
were held with the consent of all members
and the outcomes were accepted
unanimously. Evidently, no irregularity
other than procedural, was involved.
Regarding the imposition of charges
in money terms on the members, the
recommendation of the Mathur Committee
on this issue, as already approved, should be
followed.
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19351/2025 Page 3 of 6
Digitally Signed
By:RAHUL
Signing Date:20.05.2026
17:16:13

xxxx
13. The Court has heard the ld. Counsels for the parties.
The clear picture that emerges from the facts submitted
and the documents placed on record is that the
Petitioners have been deprived of the legitimate
entitlement to their property rights over the last two
decades. The mistake, if any, could have only been of the
Housing Society and the RCS and not of the Petitioners.
Initially, there were some pending dues due to which the
Petitioners were not permitted to participate in the draw
of lots. Thereafter, having cleared the said dues, the
Petitioners’ names were forwarded to the RCS by the
Housing Society, however, no action has been taken on
the same by the RCS. This has led to considerable
harassment of the Petitioners. A perusal of the note
dated 20th September, 2011, of the then Hon’ble
Lieutenant Governor, Delhi, would clearly show that
opportunity of regularization in such cases ought to be
granted, if there is no irregularity in the allotment.
14. The Housing Society’s affidavit is clear to the
effect that the Petitioners are valid allottees in the
society. The Housing Society initially requested RCS to
do the draw of lots in respect of the Petitioners,
however, since there was no action taken by the RCS,
the Housing Society conducted the draw of lots only for
the concerned members. A substantial numbers of
members have been allotted their respective flats after
the draw of lots which was conducted by the RCS. This
Court of the opinion that the Housing Society obviously
did not have any ill-motive in conducting the self draw
of lots. The RCS ought to have taken a pragmatic view
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19351/2025 Page 4 of 6
Digitally Signed
By:RAHUL
Signing Date:20.05.2026
17:16:13

of the matter rather than repeatedly insisting on
technicalities.
15. After having perused the noting of the Hon’ble
Lieutenant Governor, Delhi, this Court is of the view
that the RCS ought to have extended the benefit of the
same to the Petitioners. The RCS having failed to extend
the same, ought not to compel the Petitioners to run
from pillar to post for allotment of their flats.
16. Under these circumstances, this Court
exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, hereby regularises the self draw
of lots conducted by the Housing Society in favour of the
Petitioners.
17. The RCS shall now forward the names of the
Petitioners within a period of two weeks to the DDA, so
that the DDA can then execute the respective lease
deeds in favour of the Petitioners. The said process shall
be completed within a period of two months from now
th
i.e., by 15 July, 2025.”
8. In view of the precedent which has been extracted above and in view
of fact that the Society has no objection if the allotment is made in favour of
th
the Petitioner, let the Petitioner and the Society appear before the RCS on 4
June, 2026 at 11.30am.
9. The RCS shall within a period of two months take a decision for
allotment bearing in mind the decision referred above. The RCS shall verify
the documents produced by the Petitioner and the Society and proceed with
the allotment of the Petitioner’s flat. If there are any deficiencies in the
documents or fees etc., the Petitioner and the Society shall cure the same.
10. The allotment process shall be completed within a period of two
months. The recommendation shall be sent by the RCS to the DDA within the
said period of two months. Thereafter, the Petitioner is free to apply to the
DDA for conversion of leasehold to freehold. If such an application is made,
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19351/2025 Page 5 of 6
Digitally Signed
By:RAHUL
Signing Date:20.05.2026
17:16:13

the DDA, after completion of necessary formalities, shall also process the
conversion application.
11. The Petitioner is granted liberty to move an application if the needful
is not done by any of the Respondents and the DDA.
12. The petition is disposed of in these terms. Pending applications, if any,
are also disposed of.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUDGE
MADHU JAIN
JUDGE
MAY 19, 2026
dj/ck
Signature Not Verified
W.P.(C) 19351/2025 Page 6 of 6
Digitally Signed
By:RAHUL
Signing Date:20.05.2026
17:16:13